MISCELLANEOUS PAMPHLET SERIES 



Number Three 



January, 1908 



THE LEADERSHIP 

OF 

SHAKESPEARE 



BY 

ALLEN DAVENPORT 

AUTHOR OF 

STAGE AFFAIRS IN AMERICA TODAY' 

(The Theatre at the beginning of the Twentieth Century) 



BOSTON, MASSACHUSETTS 

P. O. BOX 134I 



TEN CENTS PER COPY 



|U6RARY«f 

■ Two Copies 



cuss4 'XXc H 

Contents of 
"Stage Affairs in America Today.'' 

I. The Playwright: the vital importance of his com- 
mission. 
II. The Business Manager: his true mission. 

III. The Actor: the quality of his .importance. 

IV. The Stage Manager: his decaying power. 

V. The Theatre Orchestra: its enforced protrusive obed- 
ience. 
VI. The Dramatic Critic: the rightful censor; but not 

merely "by the courtesy of the theatre." 
VII. The Vaudeville System: the morally illegal abuse of 
its true meant significance. 
VIII. The Prevailing Stock System; its practises a detri- 
ment to art aim. 
- IX. The Star System: its manifest condition generally 
irrelevant to the consequences of its true meaning. 
X. The Repertoire System : many compensations for its 
marked decadency. 
XI. The One Play Combination System: its advantages 
for art accomplishment if wisely pursued. 
XII. The Dramatic School: its futile results. 

XIII. Acting: its tangibility as an art to be studied.' 

XIV. Shakespeare: the future highest value of his plays to 

the stage. , 

XV. The New Theatre : a suggestion regarding the per- 
manent exaltedness'of the stage. 

"The Miscellaneous Pamphlet Series." 

I. The Theatrical Independent Movements. 
"•II. The Organized Theatre. 
III. The Leadership of Shakespeare. 

(Later numbers in preparation for publication.) 

Copyright, 1908, by" Allen B. Davenport. 



T 






313 



8 

ft 
H 
& 

N 

M 



ft 

K 



CU £ co 

ir ^ 

o o -a 

s >- 5 

•H-Cg 

co a? '£ 



pi 

111 

+- co •£ 

3 5^ 
c •- *- 
£ CD u-i 

I 3 ° 

45 +s >^ 

a c o 

r- J-. <U 

f gsr 

° "3 **» 

u >- i« 

*C £ 

•*-» <U > 

cu •£?, <u 
u „j3 

c cu *-" 

•2 «« ho 

O i3 ,- 

c 2c 

'to o o 

co •- a 

oj .5? O 

~ <o CO 



4° 



w i .s 

"^ « CO 

2 S " 

CU HJ 

O «G ~ 

£ rt 3 



a N w 






CU 

03 co 

a, w 
*> 

o 



CO 



« "3 a 



5, Si 






o 



NioissHdOHd aaunvnD e 



c 

s 



o3.> 

> £2 

<U 3 
to 

0> 4) 



3 ft- 13 

• rt <u 3 



CU 



^ 3xao- 



to ' 



I 

Oh 



o © 

.a « 

§-* 

4) C^ 

S o 

5o 
c 

O CO 

°a 

.CO 



S ° 

fitfl. 

rt cu 73 

is « a 



CO 

s§ 

rt"-3 

&•§ 



CO 



13 « 

o E 

co ™ 

co cu -C 

CU > CO 

r- _ n 



fi ,ooo 

6.5 rtp 
o S-H-d 

i tf S3 rt 

° „, ^-° 



3 G cj 
T3-~-d 3 



cut3 

■S co d a 

CU jT^ 1 O^ 

- O ° CU 
3 0,0 ^ >1 
'?c«^^^ 



3 u ^> <■ 

■5 O c rt n 

*t«a cu t£ = 

.HSc5^ 

C ^ 3 
O **•- t>' 

•53 t> 0*43.1 









>- CU - . 

•8 S 2 

rt « 3 

aj ™ e/> 

P . C 



fi,| 



3 O 



— _co 

15 



o 

III 

co • rr 



<^ 3 










8 



C <L> *-■ 

c « 
.5 «« &c 

cc) rt 

"S-tfJ 
l-S g 

co o o 

o , _C 

3 I 
co ■•> C 

a, t - 
<u •- o 

~ CO CO 



e - M 



cu u 

c >» <u £ 

O CU ~ n! 

•S > "S « 

O <G >> 

I « .s g 



cu <i -, ™ a! 



s 


O cu 


c 


.- •*-' 


CD 


0) u 


e 

73 


C o 


9 


o-° 




■M -V 


£j 


^s 




p as 


-G 


O W) 






o 


1 ^ 




£j 




cu > 


oj 


6 a> 



if 1 B §• 



•skills 

O cu <o w "S c 

£~ « ^ x o 



;« e « >i.s' 



5 l°2 5f5rt 






ft *>£ <5.d P ~ <u OhC^ § a 



a.Su s jj^ -s 4,^ fe c"g go g 




rt fc o w c.2 3 









M0ISS3J0ild aaidllvnO 3H1 :3iIlV3Hl 3H1 30 AinVIlN3S93 3H1 






« o-S 

+-< )5C (J 

'13 cu 



O •— cu 



o o 



T 3 •S'tf 

a) 3 '" 
B So 



g O "J 



co ' 

co rt C 
S-O 
rt cu o 

III 
g|.s 

co 2 
co cuJ2 
cu > co 

^G <- 
<u .G - 1 " 



co ^> 



co 






cu^G-S ? 3 

CU aT Or- 



2JS cu 2 
3 g.3 2 § 






rt*-3 

D-D, 

^ CO • X 

ego o"^ r "aj S_^ 
cu e t; ** )X co i-i_c-c 

■"Stir 



; ^2^2"S 

,3ao 



"S G S 



E.!_ 



2| c 



-B c s ™ 

8- « 



p s5r 



T3— OS 
T3 rtJ3 



^=^ <u o 

■S O c rt rt 
T3 cu bJOG 

.f||6| 

j= « 2-c c 



-«= o !^"S G 
2 3 8 §^-5 

■^ >. rt y J; ^ 
- l rG > — • g o c 

2 o' a M,C = 



c « 



"*J u rt u 5 rj 



^i 






»t G .*J co D, r -C 



.sViSJE-w 

5 Cotu*»rt_-«,c« 



G-^T3 O'O^ 



o J £ 



•• D-^T3 O 






f* »y«!cu*-:Gcu^ 

IiHIP|: ; 

S § to fll 

v y^.2 

8 Sv B 



g «r S P*fi 



• (O *j 



cu .-5 c ^ ™ .S co . 



„5^ cu G rt E O^ 
tf-GO-G-o g'B.S 0^.2 
CG^<-cuOC'S*- , feiJ 

'Xi £ < . ts « «> . m « .E, 

coT3-« kTiS *C co c-S " 

i8«laisisi : 



i^i^ 



WW 

25 



8 



T3 

a 
o 



g, 





M s 







2* 


0) 




2 


>-i 




rt 


CD 




£ 


-O 




^J 


C 




>- 


3 




o 


boo 




Vl_l 


c 




o 








•*-» 






ri 




d 


Vh 




cJ 


<L> 






a, 


c 


"Si 


o 


.2 


W 


j>* 


rt 


d 

o 




. N 




rt 




*c 


# o 


*S 


C 

£ 


<u 




X 


O 




rt 




-C 


a. 
£ 




6 
u 


>> 






en 




■4-T 

C 


-»-> 




<u 








53 










<V 


o* 




o 


>-■ 




u 


c 
o 




<u 



8 



rt 

"5 

c - 



fc I 



as 

1 

& 

i 

c 

B 



1 i-js & 

W 3 <u 
«* a u ja 



.3 be 



S2 

c o 

cu 

"73 Cfl 
CD 

J* S 

rt u-i 

CD 

u « 



O ** 

W Cfl 

** > 

cu 

o -r 

** fab 

S d 



£ O 



OU * 

Oh CD 



~ IB * 

^ w SR -o 
bo a ... 



cd K, 

.2 SfS 



CD 



co w £ 

0-T3 S •? 



° .2 

03 rH 

<u d 

CD U 

-— h rt 

73 q 

rt o 



•±3 rt cu 

£ d 2 

c £ co 

cu <, VC 
> CJ 

d . d 

£ c ^ 

rt cc rt 

° JS5 

3 o £ 

w «-» O 
CU l-c 

^ d «h 

s -B-o 



en 


>, 




3 


-O 




,0 






> 


d 










d 






CJ 


<v 




(1) 






X 


rt 
a; 


c 


V 


o 


V 


^ 


^_J 


Xi 




CJ 








<-M 


U 


In 


o 


*3 


P 



cu TO 
Ih 

5 So 

O rt 



| o o 

bi3 c ^ 
£T rt <£ 

rt Oh ** 
rt 4> *H 

o-c o 



b ^ £ 



rt o 



to cj M 

£ CQ =3 



- 8, .2 

v rt +2 

en -je rt 

j- en cj 

X 5 rt 



2 1 

.2 sa 



•° 3 

^ en 

rt "3 

u d en 

a "' * 

o ""cd rt 

jrt cu T 

O <d jQ 



o 

B 



i 
i 



en 

rt 3 u rt cu 



§ < 

r— I C 

rt g 

cu <v 

1-1 fa 



CO 






•xoisiAiaans 



5 % 5 ^' v 

M <7 .2 <D _w 

I .s S § 1 

en d w P< ft 

s c^ s a £ 

« a & ► 



CO 



In 

| 

C 

I 



cu '-^ 

: rt — 



1«^" 



cu 

£ 


d 

<L> 


£ 
o 




U 


W 



ft >» 

cu g 

CO rt 



4) 

be 



a S 



d o- ^ 

A) " rt 



^ £ £ 
|oft, 

rt " In 



Soo 

O 'en " 

d 0< ^ 

ChO 
en 

l> en tj 
»h *2 rt 

TO -*-" *-> 
<U ^ CU 

.£ cucu > 



•g OJ g 

-4-> ** TO 

tn eC -r 

ft. JS >> 

•g •&-§ 

rt cu rt 

r« ~ en 

™ y 4) 

-C en -q 

bjo d 2 

S -S .£ 






© 



"S z 



© 

1 

I 



hC hL X! 
G en c 

•= ft «» 



3 - s 

d 
rt 

£ . 
o 



M-e 



c 
cu 

bp £ 

_ o 

+-» CU 

<u ii +j- 

> rt G 
•g CU CU 



- --H en en 

■t-i rt H-i <— . 

g c rt 

3 cu * 

g d g .2 

■° f s 

s^ % . 

rt ° .2 

tn ti 

t^ -h rt 

rt c S-- 

txo T, rt Xi 



en en hfl 

cu cu c 



cu "" O 
cu X3 

.^ aj TO 

CU ^_D 

r rt t-i 



JK-5 £ 



rt cu cj rt 



rt £ 
cu i; 



THE LEADERSHIP OF SHAKESPEARE. 



In all great purposes we find a firmly settled, funda- 
mental, basic principle; a simple formula for pro- 
cedure. An unshaken law; the solicitation to some 
stern belief. 

The day is at hand, when in the theatre, personality, 
talent, genius (or what you will), must become sub- 
servient and amenable to the predominant virtues of 
education and decorum. There can be no great theatre 
otherwise. Even so, the former will find their own, 
and be bettered a thousand fold by the test. 

The theatres' enemies, its desecraters, mostly live 
inside its walls. They possess therein no faith ; unless 
it be a conceit of themselves. The theatre as an in- 
stitution, bears no proper significance to them in their 
wanton waste and abuse of its highest possibilities. 
It is only a means to superficial existence and vanity. 
When extravagance and presumptuous egotism de- 
stroy the structure that they had hoped might satiate 
their greed, there is nothing left. They think only to 
build a new structure, not knowing nor caring what 
it may contain. They pretend to adjust the theatre 
to the vulgar understanding of what the public wants. 
That is the shield to mask their purposed appeal to 
the sensuous craving for careless entertainment. Shall 
the theatre ever stand for anything higher, more dig- 



-2- 

nified and potent ? Is it worth while ? Or shall it sink 
lower into this blind understanding of what the public 
wants ? 

The theatre is capable of fulfilling a high mission; 
of bestowing positive beneficence on communities 
by imparting definite truths in the universal adoption 
by its incumbents of a single belief; such an one as 
the unshaken, superior law of its immortal leader, — 
"to hold, as't were, the mirror up to nature; to show 
virtue her own feature, scorn her own image, and the 
very age and body of the time its form and pressure." 

Any argument on the comparative beneficence to 
mankind of the Church and the theatre in America 
today, is hardly worth the discussion; to assert as 
much would be to dangerously approach blasphemy. 
The latter . is of like relation to the former as any 
other industrial condition; the Church, through its 
intellectual liberalism, having ever the same purposed 
care in common regarding all kinds and conditions 
existing in daily life. But this is not to gainsay that 
the theatre, if it were loosed from the sordid hands 
of irregular commercialism, illiteracy, and charlatanry, 
might not fulfill a mission greater than does any in- 
stitution save that of the' Church. 

Maintaining for the moment this fact — that there 
could exist a comparative beneficence to mankind in 
the missions of these institutions, the Church and the 
theatre — in thinking so, we will reason briefly on some 
argument relative to the fact. It is necessary first to 
impartially consider these vital two questions: — the 
manifest designs of each institution, and — the evi- 
denced honest and devoted endeavors of its separate 
individuals to truly live up to the best understanding 
of the highest development of such designs. 



The individual should have consummate belief in 
the sincereness of the task undertaken. He must have 
character, ability, and integrity, of course ; but without 
belief in the honesty and worthiness of his work he 
cannot truly apply to that labor his highest character, 
greatest ability, and staunchest integrity. The play- 
wright, the manager, and the actor must have belief 
in the worthiness of the institution of which he is- a 
vital part. Otherwise, he cannot apply his highest 
character, ability and integrity towards properly 
amusing, persuading, and uplifting the people to a 
just acceptance of his intentions. 

In which of these two walks of life, the pulpit and 
the stage, consists, among its individuals generally, 
the deepest knowledge of the true exactions and the 
highest understanding of his vocation, — which posses- 
ses the greatest belief? Every impulse, prejudice 
even, and sense of loyalty presses me to answer — the 
stage ! But I cannot with honesty so answer. 

The clergyman may grow to some misgivings con- 
cerning the special creed he has adopted, but never 
in his belief of the church as a means to helpfulness 
in our daily lives towards walking honestly, piously, 
and morally in the midst of our fellow men; to offer 
us the opportunity at least to embrace some sort of 
religion. If there is often an insincereness, a hol- 
lo wness perhaps in the ceremony that masks the sim- 
plicity of its primal design, even so, such cannot of 
necessity decry the individual in his unswerving belief 
in the essential and predominant benedictions of the 
Church. All clergymen believe in the Church. When 
they cannot, they no longer remain in it. 

It is not so with the playwright, the manager, the 
actor. Few of them believe in the theatre regarding 
its manifest high designs; but still they remain in it, 



even while scoffing. More than that many of them 
ignorantly boast of an equality of service with the 
Church that the theatre pays to mankind. 

The Church is real ; the theatre must ever simulate. 
In the pulpit sits sincerity ; on the stage, the dissembler. 
Widely considered, mankind is more or less insincere, 
hypocritical, and dissembling; it possesses much un- 
reality. I am writing in a high sense; in the same 
degree as we find the unscrupulous attorney, intel- 
lectually, through cunning argument and seeming 
honesty, overcoming the truths and facts of his oppo- 
nent's reasoning, seeking to evade the laws rather 
than secure submission to their authority. So with the 
politician, the tradesman, and many others. That is 
of. the actors' art. To that extent that such dissem- 
blance becomes most highly educated and cultured, 
even to that extent do its best exponents plan most 
ably to artfully conceal such unreality, making it seem 
real. ' • 

It has always been, to a great extent, the predomi- 
nant oratorical and dramatic gifts of the pulpiteer 
which have most persuaded, convinced, entertained, 
and — to speak plainly — filled the Church pews. And 
this is irrespective of dogma, ceremonials, and differing 
forms. It is often irrespective of the importance of 
the subject matter of the sermon. In all these cases 
the real trust is impressed through unreality. So 
conducted from the pulpit it becomes illegitimate. It is 
"often only the semblance of sincerity, sometimes seem- 
ing to be the role of hypocrisy, and again, the voice 
of the' dissembler. It is superior intellect balancing 
unreality till it weighs even with reality. From the 
stage this is legitimate; it is the honest practice of 
the actor. 



-5- 

The theatre must invite the mental cunning and dis- 
semblance of these various great individuals, who, till 
now, have sought an outlet for their superior intelli- 
gence by means of other channels, — it is time now 
to attract them to a reputable, dignified, and truly 
respectable profession of the theatre where their prac- 
tice, by the very honesty of its unreality, becomes un- 
questionably the essence of legitimacy. But the in- 
dividuals so practising must have sincere belief in the 
high motive of their vocation. 

We have come to the age of written sermons. The 
pulpit is too limitable for the preacher today; he can- 
not reach far enough from thereon. The theatre shall 
hold him. That institution must deservedly transcend 
to such necessity; its mission now lies there. A 
greater purpose rests in this dawning universal Church, 
this far reaching religion; and it shall be held alone 
by the indestructible oneness of the Christ idea; in 
the grand simplicity of his everlasting leadership. 

But we cannot ever gainsay the necessity, the abso- 
lute usefulness since the beginning, of all varying 
creeds, dogmas, and mystical speculation to the steady 
advancement of the Church. It was vitally essential 
that all these great questions and problems should 
be asked and solved, in order to bring us nearer to 
the one common understanding. Then, what has ever 
been the all-powerful factor pervading and determin- 
ing these necessary, momentous contemplations? 
Learning, the power of education. Its steadfastness 
is all-needful now in the ultimate fixedness of the 
universal Church. And so shall it be with the theatre ! 

THE SHAKESPEARE IDEA. 

In significantly securing the perpetuity of the theatre 
through the leadership and fundamental teaching of 
Shakespeare, it must not be thought that in the adop- 



-6- 

tion of such an essential settlement, it would be to 
the exclusion of a liberal and wise affiliation of the 
worthy dramatic literature of all times. Quite the 
reverse. We see in Shakespeare principally the form- 
ula, the procedure, and the consummation of some 
rational, tangible and catholic policy in the establish- 
ment of a qualification for the profession of the theatre, 
be that qualification whatsoever the wisdom of its 
generators might provide. There would be a text- 
book of sensible revision, and possible of continual 
additions to meet, and make adaptable, the progres- 
siveness of the hour. Our religion should not be the 
worship of useless and cumbersome traditions. Shake- 
speare's plays should be methodically instituted, and 
made to ever remain a study in literature, dramatic 
expression, and research. And, .overtowering all, 
there should ever remain their spirit quality, the 
Shakespeare idea, preserved in his immortal leadership. 
The inspiration that transcends all others; but not to 
their own special value. The established theatre of 
Shakespeare ! 

At the beginning, in the anticipation of the una- 
voidable contentions which must arise when con- 
fronted with a too literal interpretation of the Shake- 
speare law, — "to hold, as't were, the mirror up to 
nature," — let us bring at once to bear on the question, 
the significant, all-important understanding of an 
immortal leadership; then, we who would otherwise 
lightly weigh in a common scale of understanding this 
fundamental truth, must now correspondingly tran- 
scend our translation to a much finer measure; one 
truly commensurate with the loftiness and ideality with 
which we should look upon and reverence such inspira- 
tional immortality in leadership. In the theatre today, 
many of its incumbents who are writing, producing, and 



-7- 

exhibiting, think that they are truly "holding the mir- 
ror up to nature," in that they ever seek in "realistic 
effects," to mirror the ordinary commonplaceness in 
life, through the exposition of incidents and persons 
transplaced from the original sources from which such 
ideas and characters were drawn. In this unstudied 
understanding of Shakespeare's mission to the men 
and women of the theatre, we see only a compromising 
apology. 

We cannot, with reason, believe that this great 
leader, imbued with the highest knowledge of nature — 
truth — meant nor taught that the mere commonplace- 
ness of life should be photographically transplaced 
to the environments of the theatre, regardless of the 
conventions and licenses of art, and the unavoidable 
unreality of setting in which must be artfully shown 
the form and pressure of the very age and body of the 
time, justly featuring and imaging their virtues and 
scorns in the representation of the great truths of life. 

Who can gainsay the interior existence and enforced 
intention of these truths, whether they come garbed in 
the exterior form of harsh reality, of sublime poetry, 
of enchanting fantasy, or the ridiculousness of bur- 
lesque? Throughout all of these we find the means 
to the art of representing life. And throughout the 
expanse of human life and thought, we find its consum- 
mation in Shakespeare — the immortal leader. He has 
delineated it in every variety of phase. It is seen 
through the simplest diction, and in the sublimest 
poetry; throughout are reflected the simple and great 
truths of life. The quality of the mirror only may 
change ; for it is now vulgar reality, now poetry, now 
fantasy, and now farce. And as the moving char- 
acters of daily life, in the mere external reflection of 
themselves, that is, — in the exact and truthful copy 



-8- 

of their forms, whether in beauty or in ugliness, — are 
most clearly and pointedly seen in mirrors most art- 
fully and consummately designed, and ever most de- 
fectively and untruthfully revealed in the crude reality 
of nature's offering, so shall the innermost great truths 
of their lives, in their softest beauty and in their great- 
est ugliness, find a more exact and truthful copy in 
the most highly consummated mirror that shall hold 
them up to nature. 

It is an ungainsaying fact that the dramas that have 
enforced with greatest effectualness the truths of life, 
have ever been set in the unrealistic plan of poetry. 

If we accord to Shakespeare an unmeasured tran- 
scendency, we can find no contradiction in his works 
to gainsay this fundamental law. A mind so supreme 
would not be content with such inconsistency. We are 
ever prone to theorize and speculate as to the thought 
intention of some sublime stanza. Should we be too 
hasty to preserve a literal exactness in our under- 
standing of "to hold, as't were, the mirror up to 
nature?' 1 As elsewhere, we should also here tran- 
scend to the undeniable loftiness of the immortal 
leadership. 

The clergyman could not be who was unpossessed 
of a fundamental knowledge of his work; if he were 
ignorant and unlearned,— in truth, if he were not edu- 
cated. How can the men and women of the theatre 
claim any just relation regarding the equality of the . 
-earnestness, devotion, and character of the mission 
-they would fulfill, when the vast majority of their num- 
bers — unrightfully professing and practicing an art, 
and still clamoring for an equal recognition with the 
Church as a beneficiary to mankind— when such I say, 
have known no drudgery of preparation, and neither 
respect nor recognize the necessity of academic train- 



-9- 

ing and discipline in the preparation of an intellectual 
pursuit — the vocation of acting ? 

And finally what can so well exalt this intellectual 
vocation, this dignified and potent profession of the 
theatre, as an unshaken, genuine condition of belief 
in the superior existence of an immortal leadership? 

"I see all human wits 

Are measured but a few ; 

Unmeasured still my Shakespeare sits, 

Lone as the blessed Jew." 
We shall ever accept in this quatrain of Emerson's, 
a substantial reasoning. Why should we not conse- 
crate such immortal leadership to its rightful authority 
in the theatre, that we may indeed, in simple truth, 
ever be able "to hold, as't were, the mirror up to 
nature; to show virtue her own feature, scorn her 
own image, and the very age and body of the time 
his form and pressure?" 



SUPPLEMENTARY NOTE. 

Following this number of the Miscellaneous 
Series, (but at no certain date), will appear in order 
pamphlets concerning: — The Society of Actor, The 
Order of Manager, and The Office of Playwright. 

In the plan for an Organized Theatre, these essen- 
tial elements should become in themselves individual 
bodies, electing their own officers, and instituting their 
own special rules and by-laws for the purposes of high 
social development and self-improvement amongst their 
individual incumbents. 



